5 ms·

I bet one day these damn panels are gonna kill a crew. Non haptic controls in critical systems like cars, planes, and rockets are an insane fad.

by j-pb 6y ago

rcurry 6y ago
This. Maybe I'm just ignorant about the reliability of the screens that they're using, but those sure scream single point of failure to me.
- jackyinger 6y ago
  I agree and would add that we’ve gotten very used to touchscreens on our very multi-purposed phones and tablets. Navigation is a fairly fixed function. I doubt these astronauts are going to installing new apps on their way to orbit... Interestingly offshore sailboat racers (IMOCA 60 class for instance) prefer keyboards and thumb ball mice. They’re not pulling g’s, but they experience some pretty extreme motion from waves.
  - dahfizz 6y ago
    Not all navigation is created equal. When navigating in a car or boat, you need to be able to look ahead and pay attention. Therefore physical control are better because you can use them without looking at them. That's not the case in a space ship. Additionally, piloting a space craft is infinitely more complicated. Just take a look at the Apollo 11 control module[1]. I think having a single place where you receive all your information and react to it is way better than having to memorize the location and function of thousands of physical elements. [1] https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/apollo-11-3.png https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/apollo-11-3....
- nickik 6y ago
  Man if only they had 2 of the most experience pilots in the world that could test and validate ever one of the design decisions and could influence the design to their liking. If those guys had also space flight experience and could review all the engineering done on the capsule, that would be the way to do it. Oh, that is exactly what happens.
EvanAnderson 6y ago
I'm thinking the same thing. SpaceX isn't to the point in this endeavor where they should be worrying about making things look "sexy". If there isn't an objective improvement in doing something in a non-flight-tested way then I'd be highly suspicious.
- abhorrence 6y ago
  Though I agree making the interior sexy is not particularly important. I think a large portion of SpaceX’s success thus far is due to making space sexy and interesting to the public again.
- derekp7 6y ago
  Part of their mission is to inspire the next generation. So if it doesn't add to the cost or make it more hazardous, making it look good / futuristic can have a positive payoff if some 10 year old kid looks at it and decides to go into a STEM field and invent something cool.
bryanlarsen 6y ago
They have real buttons for all the important things, including a large "abort" lever.
rrss 6y ago
I agree for cars and planes, but for spacecraft, the crew doesn't really need to "keep their eyes on the road," so to speak (and it's not like the spacecraft controls can be done without looking, anyway, like turning up the radio). Comparing to Apollo, I can imagine that being able to impose some hierarchy on the controls could be beneficial (rather than having all 566 switches laid out across the cabin), and the reliability is probably better than one dedicated switch per control, since the control can be used on any of the several touch screens. Apollo 14 nearly failed due to a faulty switch. Apollo 12 was saved by flipping a switch that was not well known. Are there other incidents where the controls were critical? In general it seems like when the astronauts are in a hurry you've probably already got major issues, and being able to find the control out of the hundreds (or thousands) is probably more important than being able to flip it with your eyes closed.
orbital-decay 6y ago
Astronauts are going to wear the pressure suits with gloves, so it's hard to have such controls anyway. Touchscreens are fine when they are replacing MFD side buttons, which aren't typically haptic to begin with. (as well as most buttons on the Soyuz panel, for example)

I bet one day these damn panels are gonna kill a crew. Non haptic controls in critical systems like cars, planes, and rockets are an insane fad.

by j-pb 6y ago

I bet one day these damn panels are gonna kill a crew. Non haptic controls in critical systems like cars, planes, and rockets are an insane fad.

rcurry 6y ago

This. Maybe I'm just ignorant about the reliability of the screens that they're using, but those sure scream single point of failure to me.

jackyinger 6y ago
I agree and would add that we’ve gotten very used to touchscreens on our very multi-purposed phones and tablets. Navigation is a fairly fixed function. I doubt these astronauts are going to installing new apps on their way to orbit... Interestingly offshore sailboat racers (IMOCA 60 class for instance) prefer keyboards and thumb ball mice. They’re not pulling g’s, but they experience some pretty extreme motion from waves.
- dahfizz 6y ago
  Not all navigation is created equal. When navigating in a car or boat, you need to be able to look ahead and pay attention. Therefore physical control are better because you can use them without looking at them. That's not the case in a space ship. Additionally, piloting a space craft is infinitely more complicated. Just take a look at the Apollo 11 control module[1]. I think having a single place where you receive all your information and react to it is way better than having to memorize the location and function of thousands of physical elements. [1] https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/apollo-11-3.png https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/apollo-11-3....
nickik 6y ago
Man if only they had 2 of the most experience pilots in the world that could test and validate ever one of the design decisions and could influence the design to their liking. If those guys had also space flight experience and could review all the engineering done on the capsule, that would be the way to do it. Oh, that is exactly what happens.

EvanAnderson 6y ago

I'm thinking the same thing. SpaceX isn't to the point in this endeavor where they should be worrying about making things look "sexy". If there isn't an objective improvement in doing something in a non-flight-tested way then I'd be highly suspicious.

abhorrence 6y ago
Though I agree making the interior sexy is not particularly important. I think a large portion of SpaceX’s success thus far is due to making space sexy and interesting to the public again.
derekp7 6y ago
Part of their mission is to inspire the next generation. So if it doesn't add to the cost or make it more hazardous, making it look good / futuristic can have a positive payoff if some 10 year old kid looks at it and decides to go into a STEM field and invent something cool.

bryanlarsen 6y ago

They have real buttons for all the important things, including a large "abort" lever.

rrss 6y ago

I agree for cars and planes, but for spacecraft, the crew doesn't really need to "keep their eyes on the road," so to speak (and it's not like the spacecraft controls can be done without looking, anyway, like turning up the radio). Comparing to Apollo, I can imagine that being able to impose some hierarchy on the controls could be beneficial (rather than having all 566 switches laid out across the cabin), and the reliability is probably better than one dedicated switch per control, since the control can be used on any of the several touch screens. Apollo 14 nearly failed due to a faulty switch. Apollo 12 was saved by flipping a switch that was not well known. Are there other incidents where the controls were critical? In general it seems like when the astronauts are in a hurry you've probably already got major issues, and being able to find the control out of the hundreds (or thousands) is probably more important than being able to flip it with your eyes closed.

orbital-decay 6y ago

Astronauts are going to wear the pressure suits with gloves, so it's hard to have such controls anyway. Touchscreens are fine when they are replacing MFD side buttons, which aren't typically haptic to begin with. (as well as most buttons on the Soyuz panel, for example)